Thread: Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

Originally Posted by maxparrish

Now real discrimination is the era of Jim Crow, segregation, and thousands of lynchings. It is when a black man was not permitted to enroll in a public college, who couldn't get a job that amounted to more than that of a bell hop or janitor, or when his church was burned and his housing relegated to unheated and kerosene lit shacks. Real discrimination was when a black dancer or singer at a white club was not permitted to sit at a table, and who had to eat in the Kitchen during his/her breaks. Real discrimination was when no hotel in a City accepted black lodgers, which required them to sleep on tour buses or lodge with black families. THAT my friend, is REAL discrimination.

Today LGBT face next to nothing, other than State acknowledgement of "marriage" (soon to be ended in the remaining states). They make more money than hetrosexuals, they work in every industry at every level (including CEOs), they are not (and never have been) excluded in any housing, hotels, restaurants, state schools, or relegated to the work of bell hops and janitors. Even the worst era, the raiding of gay bath-houses and being arrested for solicitation in public parks is NOTHING compared to what blacks went through.

And today, even that is history. Seriously, who ever heard of even a smattering of rental discrimination or 'over-pricing' to gays? Who has ever heard of restaurants routinely (or even occasionally) refusing to serve a gay?



Actually I think its about the insecurity and imaginary oppression that LGBTs gin themselves into believing. Its about the narcissism of gays who are so insecure about their own identity that they crave recognition and need to declare their "pride". It's about the lack of a gay equivalent to whites only Woolworth counters, and the drive to find someone, somewhere, in a nation of 310,000,000 who can prove their "oppression"... a small baker in Oregon or a lone Photographer in New Mexico to pillory.

Of course you do...you just have to find the assholes.

These "RFRA" attempt to create a replication of jim crow, where there is no legal protection period against segregation, no employment or housing protection and so on. It is the rural ****holes dictating to cities like indy that they cannot offer such protection.

But most of all it's about a heterosexual with a persecution complex, who has no room to talk period, as he will never face a law that encourages businesses to fire or deny service, or a landlord to deny housing to him for being heterosexual. Therefore this conversation is over, as i've had enough of your ****ing version of "liberty"

Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy

Didn't read the whole thread, but I have a solution. Allow the law, but include a corollary that states that the business in question should publicly announce what group that are choosing to not serve... that way those who do not want to associate with them will know that this is a "safe zone" and members of that group will avoid that place of business altogether... and anyone else who has issue with the situation.

That isn't a solution because the religious are immune from similar treatment (as is race, gender, pregnancy status etc etc), and too many especially in rural areas would be deprived of necessities. What about a town where there's one small grocery store within 30 miles? There's even a case where a lesbian couple's infant was denied medical treatment. Do we really need another jim crow? The 3 standing behind the governor while he signed the law funded the SSM ban in that state, btw

Although your suggestion is the least they could agree to - admit to being petty hateful douchebags. A database was set up in mississippi of all places when their "RFRA" passed, so people can see which businesses were friendly and STILL the bigots whined endlessly that it's not fair. I mean they are discriminating of their own choosing and we can't at least avoid the humiliation of being thrown out of a restaurant or evicted by knowing which places would do this?

But what they really crave is to keep the contagious gays away and also prevent their supporters from finding out, so it doesn't hurt business TOO much

Originally Posted by Napoleon

You don't know what you're talking about and you obviously have no idea what we went through. You're right, it was nothing compared to what blacks went through; it was worse in a lot of ways. Being relegated to the work of bell hops and janitors is nothing in comparison to the State regarding being gay as tantamount to treason and forcibly institutionalizing you. If you think LGBT people never experienced those things then you have a lot of learning to do.

Yes, the history of oppression faced by LGBT, both in this country and abroad, is abhorrent indeed. The only reason slavery or mass executions weren't commonplace (although europe from 300 up thru the holocaust and islam up thru today sure gave it a go) is because we're too small, spread out, and often invisible a minority to make that easy.

But there is still a line of atrocities in the not too distant past, from castration (alan turing), to long prison sentences, to institutionalization, "conversion"/torture camps, mccarthyism, police brutality, dishonorable discharge, expulsion, excommunication, disownment, total ostracism including death threats from revered sports figures (reggie white) - STILL no openly gay athletes in the 4 pro sports, to being one of the very few minority groups which it's total legal to fire and deny housing and marriage rights to up to this day

And then heterosexuals come in and pretend THEY are persecuted

The national backlash has been fierce and Indiana Governor Mike Pence now seems to realize that the RFRA he signed into law was a huge political miscalculation that has the potential to do irreparable harm to the State of Indiana. He now says that the Indiana legislature will convene this week to "clarify" the Indiana RFRA legislation.

Indiana governor supports 'clarifying the intent' of religious objection law


Protesters gather Saturday outside the Indiana statehouse

Pence and other supporters of the law contend discrimination claims are overblown and insist it will keep the government from compelling people to provide services they find objectionable on religious grounds. They also maintain that courts haven't allowed discrimination under similar laws covering the federal government and 19 other states.

But state Rep. Ed DeLaney, an Indianapolis Democrat, said Indiana's law goes further than those laws and opens the door to discrimination. "This law does not openly allow discrimination, no, but what it does is create a road map, a path to discrimination," he told the crowd, which stretched across the south steps and lawn of the Statehouse. "Indiana's version of this law is not the same as that in other states. It adds all kinds of new stuff and it moves us further down the road to discrimination."

Zach Adamson, a Democrat on Indianapolis' City-County Council, said to cheers that the law has nothing to do with religious freedom but everything to do with discrimination. "This isn't 1950 Alabama; it's 2015 Indiana," he told the crowd, adding that the law has brought embarrassment on the state.

On Saturday, the founder of Angie's List said the consumer review service is suspending its plans for a $40 million expansion in Indianapolis because of Indiana's new religious objections law.